Every Camera, Every Lens, No Waste

I have a zero waste policy, something that is likely a reaction to the rampant waste I have been guilty of for many years.

For far too long I bought and sold, completely out of proportion to my use or need. I lived in a world of hypothetical scenarios and fanciful non-accomplishment. People loved my cast-offs, which were often mint/boxed and way too cheap.

The turning point came with M43, or the EM5 Mk1 to be precise.

I bought one after a couple of Pen cameras wet my appetite to support the meagre lens options available about the same time I bought the 5DIII and some more EF-S lenses for my crop frame Canon cameras.

The 5DIII and lenses lasted a weekend, traded back for another EM5 and some more M43 glass.

Never looked back.

*

The “shutter savers” first, cameras that spare more specialised cameras each time I use them.

EM5 Mk1 (1-4)

The EM5/1’s are pretty worn out now. Two are basically dead, two a bit twitchy, but get use for personal projects, as a third camera or for possibly camera killing situations. The images out of these older cameras still hold up and why not?

They produce clean, sharp and flavoursome, almost “filmic” images that often strike a chord with viewers. I would not bother with them now for sport or high pressure jobs, because why would I with so many specialist options available.

There is just something about the files from these cameras.

EM10 Mk2 (2)

My little givers are for me basically my EM5/1 replacements. Often used for travel, jobs around small children, because they are cute and silent, something the EM5’s lack. One has lost the ability to show its LCD when it is used horizontally, but otherwise, not a hiccup. They are also my lucky event cameras, school balls and the like.

Pen Mini

The little red camera will likely be my last working copy of the older EM5 sensor, the camera itself is often used to distract little ones, other people when I am street shooting and if I need to let someone else use one.

*

The more serious stuff now.

Pen F

This special camera is mine, all mine! Ok they all are, but this one is a little protected, so I use it mostly for studio portraits or my own landscapes (it uses an old plunger style cable release and the grip is an Arca-Swiss tripod mount).

My special projects camera.

It is not weatherproof, particularly fast, has no focus tracking, suffers from poor silent shutter banding, forgettable video options (no Mic option), generally performing much like an EM5 or 10, but it feels special and the images are the best of that older, non-phase detect enabled sensor.

EM1 Mk2 (2)

The EM1’s have been my work horse cameras for stills particularly. They have both had a flogging and will continue to, but the key is sharing the load with all the others, so they get a decent rest when I can spare them.

A rare run for sport as the “B” camera.

G9 Mk1 (2)

The Panasonic G9/1’s are the “other” work horse cameras, but with a video lean. I prefer the way these handle, the layout and for some jobs the lighter and brighter colours, but to be honest unless video is a possibility, it is an either-or thing with the above. One of these is my most battered camera, the other hardly touched on a reserve video roll.

The Telstra shoot was my biggest private job to date. Trusting at the last minute to the G9’s perfect skin tones after some tests the night before.

EM1x (2)

The “X’s” are my sports cameras, which also stretches to events and really important stuff. These handle similarly to the G9/1’s and the image quality is close especially in low light. I especially like the responsive thumb nubbin and selectable focus zones (3 tall/wide with limited selection bands my preferred). Dated now, they still hold up and are built to take a lot. If the EM1/2’s and G9/1’s had a love child…. . This is possibly the most under rated and cheapest pro camera on the market (remember it comes with a free built-in grip and two batteries and chargers), I bought my last one mint second hand for $1300au.

For the PM, what else would do?

G9 Mk2

An upgrade across the board, the G9/2 is a video camera first, but if I need next gen stills it can be used. All up, this is my best camera. It has much deeper video specs than the S5 and is better in every other respect than most of the other cameras above, especially on balance.

Lifted off 1080 video and good enough for print.

S5 Mk1

The dreaded full-frame that had to be (or not?), the S5 is the second video cam, or the first if extremely low light or “full rig” and interview style video is wanted. The G9/2 is the more versatile camera over all, but the S5 has its uses and I may even add another (or a Sigma FP) as I am feeling the pressure of too many full frame lenses. As a stills camera, it is excellent and can be used for the very worst light, but so far I have not needed it.

I am still on the fence here. My fear is I will eventually succumb to full frame fever, something I know is not needed, but it is nice to have to option and the lenses I have picked up for L mount have been fun and cheap on the whole. If I had my time over I would have bought one or the other lens kit (S-Primes or Cine).

OSMO Mk1

Now so very much “old news”, this is still capable of 4k/60p as a decent gimbal option. It is also my underwater and high places camera. I need to use it more.

The point is, no camera is useless. Even a dated, technically challenged camera with a small sensor even, can produce images that satisfy clients. They don’t need or often want to know the why and how, but of course showing them the camera before can be unwise.

Generally, working for the school again, I use a G9/1, EM1/2 and EM10/2, each with a lens mounted and a couple of other lenses to round out the needed range, but I would rather grab a small, dated, cheap camera, set up to work with a specific lens, than change a lens mid stream.

The usual use case for each is;

G9.1 with Olympus 12-40 for stills and video. Occasionally now this is the 8-18 if I do not want to carry a bag or the light is decent.

EM1.2 with a long lens as suits (45, 75, 40-150, 75-300).

EM10.2 (or EM5/1) with a fast wide like the 15 or 17mm (the 12-40 may have a ND filter mounted for video, so this backup is much less fiddly than changing lens/filter etc).

I can duplicate these three cameras and effectively the lenses.

The 9mm is usually packed in the bag, sometimes the 30mm Sigma or the 25mm.

*

Why not an EM1x or G9.2?

No need.

These are kept for specialist jobs and a future when the EM1/G9 pairing and its second take ware out.

If you know your camera like an old friend and use it appropriately, no matter how old or limited, you are better off than someone struggling to get to grips with a new super camera.

The same goes for lenses.

I have no fear using the 12-60, 40-150 and 75-300 kit level lenses if lens speed is not an issue and the very best* AF is not critical. This means I can drop one in a bag that probably has little need of the range, just in case.

The f1.7 and 1.8 primes are like this also. You cannot complain with a straight face about their quality, so their tiny size is just a bonus. Throw a couple in your bag, a half dozen even.

*My 75, 40-150 f2.8 or f4, 300 f4 and the old 12-40 seem the best I have.

The Fated Hand.

My search for a Synco D1 has been a miss. Two have been ordered, both have fallen through and I am going to take the hint (and try to get my money back from one “seller”).

The mic is good, very well priced, but a few things were on my mind.

• The 100hr battery needed for wireless operation (needs its own power for the Lekato to work) does not have an on/off switch apparently, meaning I would have to (a) remove it each use and (b) keep a spare.

• It was also very long and I was wondering what bag would be able to take it.

• Finally the D1 looks to be on run-out.

• The brand has a bit of an iffy rep. Paid for reviews, “rip-off” designs, granted a common enough thing, and few top tier reviewers or retailers dealing with them.

• The pricing was all over the place. Rip-offs of rip-offs?

The Sennheiser MKE-600 has always been the one in the back of my mind, but until recently it seemed to be basically a less practical run-n-gun option to the MKE-400 or Zoom capsule SSH-6 I already have.

The 400 is to my mind the ultimate “always ready” shotgun mic*, being small, self contained, and high quality, the SSH-6 has again great quality with mid-side capability and the convenience/inconvenience of being a Zoom capsule.

Needs change and my possible future need is for a better boom mic, preferably one with a cordless options and better range and rejection.

I have other options to the clip, may be set for a wind sock, the bag is going to be replaced by a hard case with phones, the Lekato kit etc and the ‘plosive filter kept.

Longer, especially at the rear, no inbuilt shock mount or wind blimp like the 400 or the capsule convenience of the SSH-6 previously made it and only marginally better overall sound than either made it for me, a poor choice, but this morning I did some video with a shotgun (SSH-6 on camera with F1, mid-side to “0ff”) and it has proven to be again the way to go.

I just need more flexibility.

I have found a well priced one (about the same price as the RRP of the MKE-400 and from a genuine dealer), so about twice the price of the D1.

Genuine brand, better battery life (with on-off feature), sound that is often favourably compared to the MKH-416, compatibility with the 400 for dual mic-ing and a local retailer.

*The mic is on a shock mount inside a blimp, which solves a lot of problems.

An Elegant Solution

More mic fixes.

The Zoom F1 has a good reputation for sound, versatility and features.

A good bit of kit, when it works. Notice the cable-tie, which is not standard :).

It has a poor reputation for ruggedness though thanks to the dodgy battery door cover. The battery spring is strong, the little plastic clip holding the batteries in is shamefully flimsy. Mine broke after a minor drop of a few inches to a wooden desk top.

Turns out, many go like this.

Zoom is not well supported in Australia and mine is out of warranty, so it was annoying and considering I was using the F1 and SSH-6 as my main system for the new sports podcast at the paper, a possible project killer.

I came up with a decent fix, using a 2c cable-tie. This worked, but it did not make life much easier. The door was a sh%t design before it broke, it is almost unworkable with a cable-tie safety clip. The shock mount is also very hard to remove, only making things clumsier.

The relative ugliness of the original fix, made even more annoying by the need to pull it back over the record button to release the door. If you go the other way, you need to cut the tie and start over. The next solution is also partly visibly here filling the 5V charger port.

The F1 is a pain because its battery level readouts (common with Zooms) usually drop to two out of three bars with fresh Eneloop pro batts almost immediately, then down to one bar soon after leaving you with little idea how long you have. I was in the habit of changing them every shoot.

Not fun.

The new fix is more elegant in every way.

A mini power bank attached magnetically to the micro USB adapter pictured above. The reason for buying the magnetic option was to be able to re-purpose the unit if needed. Happily, the magnetic adapter seems to offer the spacing I need to clear the shock mount and cable-tie.

I took a chance and bought a 3000 mha mini phone charger, which manages to fit thanks to the magnetic adapter sticking out a little and the added bonus is, it has a reliable battery meter and greater capacity. The magnetic hold is decent, but not impervious to a knock, so I will have to be aware of this, or maybe come up with something to help.

No more door, no more iffy battery meters, no more messing with cable ties.

It even looks a little cool.

Cheap Fix

On the hunt for an off-camera, but wireless mic option, I have stumbled across a few ideas.

Cables cause clutter, they can pick up interference and they are limited in placement and range, but they are cheap and reliable.

Wireless has a few benefits that can outweigh the obvious downside, which is reliable signal when compared to hard cabling. Wireless offers simple and safe booming, stand placement and even hand holding options and generally longer range, although this decreases reliability.

The Lekato wireless transmitters seem to be clean, solid and reliable options as long as you don’t get anything substantial in the way (5 khz units have less robust signal for non line-of-sight signal, but are less prone to other interference), which for my use case, usually LOS over 5-10 mtrs maximum, is fine.

This opens up a lot of mic options.

The dynamics I have, the TT1 Pro Lanen being the most sensitive, need to be too close to the subject. I have tested all of them and the reality is, the mic needs to be in frame to work well, which is often ok, but not always. These are hand held, treat ’em rough stage mics.

My condensers are better, but their pickup pattern is too wide for single person interviews in outdoor settings. These are instrument or booth mics.

I have the MKE-400 shotgun, which when used with an XLR to 3.5 adapter to the Lekato worked well. The cable I have is quite long, the mic best suited to on camera use, the overall result a little messy and that mic is the “always in the bag” mic, so the rest just would not be with it.

The Zoom SSH-6 is a Zoom shotgun capsule and a good one, so it needs to be attached to a Zoom device which is limiting. The ECM-3/6 extension cabless were on my radar, but again, are limited to the capsules only. The SSH-6 has a gain dial at the mic end. This means to control sound I would need to use the camera, which is not as intuitive or clean as the mic dial.

I looked at the Comica wireless shotgun, but it is a big investment for a mic no better than the MKE-400 and it is a closed loop, so if anything goes wrong it all falls apart. I will always go for a more versatile and better supported option. Basically I would like my “B” option to be similar to my “A”, not a whole other set-up I need to bring.

The Zoom M3 popped up again, offering 32 bit float RAW, so I could boost on camera sound, but this takes processing, something I want to avoid. I am not confident in that space yet and want to avoid unnecessary “clutter” physical or not. It is also, like the Comica, a one horse show.

I would much prefer a dedicated shotgun, with native XLR connection, but this requires battery power because the Lekato’s do not supply phantom power.

The MKE-600 Sennheiser is expensive on balance and there is too much repetition, compromise and unwanted versatility for what I need. The MKE-400 or SSH-6 are almost as good, offer this versatility and the 417 is better for booming but far too dear.

I need something that does what the 400 or SSH-6 do wirelessly, while not trying to be them in their space.

I stumbled across Synco during my searches.

The first review was a “is the Synco Mic-D2 a cheap version of the MKH-417 Sennheiser?”, which got my attention. The general consensus is no, it is not a replacement for the industry standard 417, although in controlled environments, it is almost impossible to tell by ear which is better, they are just different. It is a genuine option in the sub $400 semi-pro range.

After a lot of reviews, not many from main stream reviewers and there is a taint of a “buying” reviews scandal with this company, I am satisfied that for $170au, the Synco Mic-D1, the older and less sensitive version is a decent (very) long shotgun mic, with the minimum of features I need including battery power.

I will not be putting mine on a camera.

The newer D2 gets the most reviews (and the controversy), my search engine often defaulting to it even when I requested only D1 reviews, but there were a few direct comparisons between the two and other mics.

It boils down to;

• The D2 sounds surprisingly similar to the MKH-417 (which is 5x dearer), some say as good but different, either way, it is decent in this space.

• The D1 sounds very much the same, but needs about 25% more gain. This was often using Zoom devices, so results that matter to me.

• The D1 compares favourably to the MKE-600, NTG3, NTG2, S Mic 2, S Mic 2s, etc, which are all much dearer. Micro differences in range, rejection and tone aside, they are all enough, this one is enough on a budget.

Nobody complained it was super gain hungry like an SM7b, just weaker than some mics and self noise seems well controlled even after boosting. The MKE-400 adapted to the Lekato’s had plenty of clean gain, so I am happy I have the range.

If it works out I may even get the D2 as well for cabled use, the pair combined coming in at the price of the MKE-600, as it has better rejection and gain, but probably not as I have other options.

My setup will likely be the boomed or stand mounted* mic with the Lekato wireless adapter to the receiver on the Zoom H5, AMS-24 or F1 (with XLR capsule) to camera with backup recording and the Zoom H1n next to it or the Lark M1’s as a safety track. I will have cables at hand and use them if able, but if not, this looks workable.

My aspirations for sound recording are realistic. I just want decent, fit for purpose gear for each application. I have made a few miss-steps with too much music-centric gear, but it all has its uses and I have learned a lot. This mic seems to be a good option for occasional, specific use, when size and mobility can take a back seat to the best and simplest design choices.

*The TV crews I worked around at the paper used a mic on a shared low stand.

The Image Making Process (Or The Joys Of Being An Introvert).

I am finally free of the news paper as my main commitment.

What does this mean?

Income is now patchy and lower, but my everyday process for image making is much closer to my ideal. I am an introvert who has evolved methods of workable extroversion, but I am an introvert none the less.

For me, image making is very much a matter of immersion, patience and observation. I have found, especially lately, that by projecting my introverted, non aggressive personality, I can get images from people with little overt interaction. With thirty odd years of sales, teaching and cold contact interaction, I have the tools I need to go into any situation, but the true me is still there.

Staging images, breaking my concentration to get names, being obvious and controlling are not me. Never will be, but I have proven I can do it when I need to.

You cannot make this happen, it just does.

Last Days In The Press Corps.

I had the double weekend shift on my last working week with the paper. On one hand I will not miss that, but on the other, weekend sport could be a highlight and the one time when the chore of captioning and image opportunities are in some type of balance.

Westbury.

Cricket final.

My last sporting event.

It fits.

James Tyson on the stumps. No run out, but close. My 600mm (ff equiv) is too long for telling multi person stories in most sports, but hard not to use.

The Westbury Shamrocks are mid-dynastic high point, the third in their long history. A sweet little town just outside of Launceston, Westbury has swept the pools of all possible formats they entered in northern state mens cricket.

Ollie Wood mid delivery. I aim for one image in the delivery leap and one on follow through. I could take 20-60 a second, but you only improve your timing with single shot captures. The giant stumps are a good, quirky background, the score board, just off to the right is also ideal.

Another angle. I like this as it has the potential of multiple elements coming into play, but again, the lens is a little long. I tend to aim centrally, so the bowler is in frame as they peel off and possibly appeal or I can go left for a keeper stumping or catch etc. A 500mm equivalent would be ideal, which is why I often use the 75-300 zoom.

From the batsmen’s perspective.

The double weekend shift was a good way to end, reminding me of one of the reasons I am keen to move on, but also giving me a chance to reinforce feelings of accomplishment.

Eighteen months ago, I would have baulked (possibly wilted) at working both days of the weekend on my own, in Cricket finals season no less.

“The enemy” in this case a player from Ulverstone on the north coast which is covered by our competition (The Advocate).

By this time, I have evolved from “hope I get a useable shot”, to “this is what I am aiming at achieving” and usually getting it. Not bragging, just assessing my growth.

All the above elements in one image (except the ball).

Sport in particular has tightened up considerably, less shots being taken, better results achieved from those I do take.

I will miss the winter sports like local AFL, Basketball, Netball and the people I potential could meet, but not much else.

A Boom Outlier.

Looking at wireless mic options, I may have stumbled on a double fix.

Dynamic mics are well serviced with wireless options, but they have other issues with boom use.

Dynamic mics do not need a power supply (called phantom power), they are tough and handle well (“drop the mic” is a dynamic mic thing, you do not want to drop a more sensitive condenser), can withstand high sound levels, close proximities, tend to have good basic wind/pop protection and are cheap for their quality. As little as $100au can get you a good one.

They are generally considered poor for boom work though, because they are less sensitive and tend to have a wide polar pattern, meaning they need to be quite close for best results. If you can get them close though, they are perfect for voices.

The sE V7 got a run today as a wireless option, with booming as a possibility. The V7 is not my most sensitive dynamic mic, the TT1 Prodipe is better, but it was decent enough into a H5 (the H8 and possibly AMS-24 may be better). The TT1 has already handled a “round table” panel situation with all speakers over a foot and a half from the mic, which was beyond all expectations.

The big suprise is wind handling. My fan test on the base unit produced a low, even hum, but when I stretched another foam pop cover over the top, it basically disappeared! This will also help with the original intent of the filter, removing ‘plosives from too-close speakers.

Being a stage mic, handling is not an issue, but weight potentially is. It is much heavier than a shotgun, but is well balanced and not a great strain (no cabling is a nice mitigation). If I drop it, I have no fear of damaging the mic, maybe what it lands on though.

The polar pattern in supercardioid, not the tightest, but not totally unusable. Even Cardioid, which I s basically “all forward” is acceptable depending on surrounding sounds.

More focussed Hyper cardioid is preferred, or even tighter.

Lobar or shotgun patterns are very tight, which allows for high rejection of off-axis sounds, but for this application, controlled booming for interviews and podcasts, it may be fine (I have shotguns). This pattern can also be problematic in poorly treated spaces as the rejection can cause out of phase echos.

The big advantage though is, dynamic mics are reliable options for wireless adaptation with cheap units like the 5.8 Ghz Lekato kit ($125au). These are solid, reliable and rugged. Every option for shotguns, Lav’s or condensers, seemed expensive, messy, twitchy and fragile by comparison as well as usually being based on 2.4 Ghz signal, which is much more crowded air space.

Plenty of reviews later and I am happy with this versatile and cost effective option.

They will plug into anything XLR, have four channels and are low profile. I could set up four of my vocal mics with these. Even if the boom thing is a stretch, I will have an interview, performance or presentation option.

All good.

Best thing is they are making my least used mics more useful.

I will get another (or maybe more) if they work out.

The nearest contenders were the ECM-3 Zoom adapter cable, same price, but cabled and limited, the Comica MV30 wireless shotgun, which is expensive ($300au) and not probably a better mic than the Zoom SSH-6 I have, or finally the MKE-600 ($350au), which is still cabled and not a huge upgrade over the MKE-400 other than better rejection and maybe a slightly longer range (talking feet not meters). The AMS-24 interface that just arrived could problem solve easily enough, but is still messy.

Boom Time!

Really, in lots of ways, but specifically, booming mics might be a thing soon and I must admit, I have not been on this properly.

Options.

• MKE-400 Sennheisser shotgun mic.

• Zoom SSH-6 on F1.

• SSH-6 with ECM-3 or ECM-6 extension cable to the F1/H5.

• Sennheisser MKE-600.

• Zoom M3 float shotgun.

• Something I own now in my extensive condenser and dynamic range to the AMS-24 or H5/F1.

• Use LAV’s.

Now booming means basically mic off camera-nearer the subject, so it is not always high above just closer, maybe on a stand or tripod. A mic should always be as close as possible to the subject.

A boom mic needs to be directional, have good off-axis rejection, good gain, low handling noise, good wind rejection and some control at the user end.

The SSH-6 is my first option, impressing me with previous uses and its mid-side option, but it has one issue, getting it close to a form factor that is practical. This can be fixed with the recently discovered ECM-3 or 6 meter cables from Zoom (you always need to check under every rock for ideas with these guys as they constantly surprise). Cost of the fix $100-120au.

The MKE-400 is the next logical option. Coming close to the performance of the MKE-600, but with built in shock and wind protection and running to a camera via a 3.5 cable, it is probably ideal. This one needs better wind protection than it currently has though. The provided “dead critter” is good, but not perfect. I could double “blimp” it. Cost of fix $0-400au.

The MKE-600 is in a lot of ways a duplication of the 400, but with better rejection and tighter gain, but not significantly superior and would be bought for just this role as I have other options for other duties. Cost of fix with wind sock $370-450au.

The Zoom M3 is interesting. It has everything the others have with 32 bit float, plus mid-side and a backup recording for added peace of mind (no levels required). The RF interference issue is unsettling, although that seems to be fixed. This mic is light, but very plasticky feeling and quite expensive. Fix cost $300au.

One of my existing condenser or dynamic mics could work. The Lewitt 040 Match and sE V7 are the most likely two. The V7 has a nice pattern, the 040’s are tiny and super sensitive. The dynamics probably need to be closer, the 040 might be a little thin sounding. Realistically, these are great indoor options, but not ideal for outdoors, especially as wind rejection is not in their design remit. Cost of fix $0-unknown for wind protection (the 040’s fit my Rode wind socks).

LAV mics like my M1 Larks are an option and a good one. The only real issues are obvious (you can see them) and they are limited to two users. In reality, these will be non-issues.

Thinking?

• My gut says spend the dollars on the MKE-600 and just get into a mic made to purpose.

• My heart says the SSH-6 on an extension, because it just works, is cheap and adds versatility to my Zoom kit overall.

• My head says the MKE-400 for the same reasons as both above. The 400 is also less likely to be used as I have previously as I will have the time for a proper Zoom rig from now on.

• A little voice on my shoulder, possibly with horns and a tail is whispering “Zoom M3”.

If I had no options except what I have now, the H5 or F1/SSH-6 works fine and at up to 30m, the F1 for boom pole work, as does the MKE-400 if the wind is within normal tolerances.

A Wind Noise Test

A basic test of the wind proofing of my current offerings and a surprise or two.

I got my Zoom kit out, the MKE-400 and a Boya MM-1 mini shotgun (which is my favourite in this class and it has a beefy wind breaker). My “wind” was a 40cm desk fan set on high from a few feet away on side to side rotation. If this was a stack of paper test, it would clear the it in seconds. I held each mic as close a half a metre from the fan.

The SSH-6 on the H5.

This is my main hope as the dead cat is decent and the mic powerful.

• Without; Ouch! This thing does not miss much.

• With; At any angle and with the mid-side pickup set at +5 to -20, slight but consistent wind sound.

Findings; Good enough for most uses, but will fail in strong or buffeting wind, possibly within fixable or ignorable tolerances. This probably rules out the M3 as that has basically the same mic in a different form.

The Boya MM1 into the H5.

• Without; not tried-no point.

• With; Ok, with consistent but generally quiet grumble. Handling noise was bad, but no shock mount used.

Findings; Not bad as an emergency option.

The MKE-400 into the H5 or Camera.

This is the logical choice, basically a MKE-600 lite.

• Without wind muff (but its own “blimp”; Ok. about the same as the Boya, but less consistent as I moved it around.

• With the muff; Better, about the same as the SSH-6 with its fluffy, maybe a little twitchier at some angles. The sock is thinner than the others, which is a shame.

Findings; Almost enough, maybe just a little under done as I have found in real world use. If I could do a decent home made blimp, I may be able to stretch this.

The surprise XYH-5 on the H5 (or H1n).

I added the H1n as well, because it is basically the same.

This one was only tried because it was there and I got its dead critter out by mistake.

• Without; Genuine pain and throw in some handling noise for good measure. Don’t try this at home kids.

• With the pop filter; About the same as the MKE on its own. There is also an “uber” pop filter also, but these are generally not the best wind barriers.

• With the fluffy (and it is fluffy, like a baby bird); The best by far. I could not get this to freak out. I even caught the fluffy on the fan trying to get a reaction!

Findings; This is the wind king both ways. It was by far the worst without shielding, the best with. Problem is an X/Y mic is not ideal for boom work being physically short and the wrong pickup configuration. I guess wide gain-thin sound is better than wind noise sometimes and the X/YH-6 has a 90 degree mode (if the wind sock fits it). This would be a good environmental option in every way, small, sensitive, wind proof and in the kit.

*

With my current resources I can do a boom mic in a few ways and even handle the nastiest of real world wind conditions, but it takes a village.

Am I better off just going the MKE-600 and a decent sock or blimp or work within my range now and see what comes, which often amounts to a lot of unfounded paranoia?

I could also maybe look at some other wind socks for the SSH-6.

Ed. We had a nasty weather front come through this afternoon so I had a chance to try the same test in blustery conditions and the same result. The SSH-6 and dead cat were good, almost good enough, but the XYH-5 and dead…gerbil (?) were even better with no hum, crackle or thump. I did get some rustling noise at first, but realised it was the head phone buds, not the mic!

The Stars, They Are (Re) Aligning.

I have officially given notice at the news paper, the second school went a few weeks ago, then I signed back on with the original school and committed my time to several not for profit organisations.

Happy days!

It feels good and it seems a good run of good luck (karma?) has been released.

Another Game, Same Process

The state team, the JackJumpers are doing well and it was as usual a lot of fun covering them recently.

On Being A Generalist And The Curse Of Specialist Opinions

I read a lot, research is probably closer to the mark and feeling a little under the weather today, I grabbed my laptop and decided to look at mics again (Zoom M3, MKE-600, Zoom F3 etc).

What struck me was hardly new, it just probably came at the right time and with time to explore.

I consider myself a generalist, someone who needs to be pretty decent, from an outsiders perceptions, at most things I try. A generalist comes unstuck sometimes when faced with specialist scrutiny, but specialists rarely cast their eye my way. Those people do their own stuff*.

Video, stills, audio all need to be done well enough to be professionally acceptable, but due to a small budget and often limited needs, I try to research as deeply as possible (I have been doing this for 30 years so reading between the lines has become a real skill), make clever moves, buy well, which requires patience, buy to do the end job, not take the many wasted micro steps that growing into a new field can sometimes force on you.

Mostly I want the best “bang for the buck” option.

I make mistakes, plenty of them, but so far, most of these have been slight, not catastrophic.

Stills.

My mix of Olympus and Panasonic M43 has been a giver. I have professional grade cameras and lenses covering 16-600mm (full frame equivalent), have depth, options, specialist gear and I always get the job done.

Never have I been accused of falling short technically (well gear wise anyway), so this has been a good move. I have some full frame for video, but rarely feel the desire to use it this way.

A 35k+ kit of a pro level full frame camera, 600mm f4 and the holy trinity of f2.8 zooms for my needs?

No way.

Video.

Panasonic has been my main ride here and it has been all good.

The G9 mk1 (with latest firmware, but not the upgrade key), the G9 Mk2 and my full frame S5 have all provided something here, often beyond my actual needs and with the OSMO pocket, not much escapes me now.

Full frame was a good move in last years landscape, a slight miss-step in light of this years, but the lenses that have come my way have been amazing. Always room for good lenses.

Sound.

Zoom has been my main recorder and interface base line and probably my one rare submission to the norm, although my approach has been unusual. Sennheisser, Lewitt and sE are my mic choices outside of that.

In all cases, I have prosumer grade by cost, but can manage most pro needs by buying carefully, with a plan and to my skill set now and in the future.

*

Getting there.

I review deeply, carefully and comprehensively. I have effectively developed another skill over the years, reviewing reviews. This started with photo mags in the 1980’s unbroken through to now with the internet.

When reading reviews, the first thing you need to work out is who is writing the review, what they personally use or need (if they do at all), what context their review is written from, what forces were at play at the time of writing and any hidden or openly revealed allegiances or bias.

Lets unpack the rules of the game.

First, what questions are you asking?

Are you looking for affirmation or clarity. Is hard and often unkind honesty genuinely sought after or are you looking until you find the answers you want? When you find those answers, do you understand them or do they raise even more questions? If they do raise questions, are these due to poor reviewing, overly technical talk or have you just broken through to another knowledge ceiling (which is good).

The reviewer.

If the reviewer is a generalist, like a generic tech mag doing a “best buys” article, where they may be drawing from other sources or limited reviews of their own, then they are limited in scope, but can still be helpful if used in conjunction with other similar reviews (the rule of three comes in here).

I only yesterday read a “best audio recorders for professional videographers” list which had the Zoom H8, H5, F1 and H1n on it (the first two as numbers 1 and 2). It was an Australian mag, so the availability, price and local popularity of the products had to be taken into account and the mag in question was a photo mag, not an audio one.

It may look the biz, but I am realistic. I know it does what I need now, probably way more, but I am open to upgrades in the future if they are warranted.

Great! I have those, job done, nice buys, but I have read other lists that do not even mention most of them and I would have to say if I were to write the same list myself, I would probably have added other interfaces from Zoom and their competition and dropped one or two from the list.

I would have because I have read more and looked under more stones, owned some and found issues and tricks. The problem here was the title “professional” videographers, should have probably read “aspiring to be professional”, but even then, it was a seriously slanted perspective.

If the reviewer is a specialist, they may have extremely high expectations so you have to put yourself in their thinking “shoes”. This comes from being in this space all the time and it happens to anyone.

The more you know, the less you tolerate and the higher your base-line expectations or assumptions may be. Many of these reviewers are reasonable and fair, but comments like “unacceptable noise floor” or “unusable edge softness” are usually too critically measured for every day users**.

Only a top end sound engineer or overly critical “wall chart” photographer will likely ever even notice these issues, the average punter, will probably not notice them even if you point them out.

Noise, both visual and audible are my two favourite Bugbears. Rarely does either matter, both are removable with software and often the chosen presentation platform removes them anyway, but measuring these two beasties can go to extreme levels.

Worse still are the pseudo-specialists, the theoretical experts, who do exhaustive reviews with flawed technique or incorrect assumptions and rarely actually use the gear. They use jargon and assumed imperatives to push their case, often with little idea themselves. These are rare, but not impossible to find.

Incorrect comments or terminology like “more of a depth of field”, “smaller apertures” when they actually mean wider ones*** (smaller numbers), or illogical conclusions like “this lens produces grainy images” are giveaways if you know what you are looking for, but that’s the point. If you know enough to pick frauds, you probably already know the answers.

If the reviewer is a new owner and someone who does not have the luxury of other options, but seems to know what they are doing and are doing it well enough, they are a good source of real world usage and discovered issues, but not a good comparison point.

I tend to like these reviews as they are honest and often enough once you have narrowed the field. They avoid analysis paralysis. Be careful of overly effusive “I bought it so I better like it” bias, even sponsored pushing, but often that comes across quickly.

Special mention - Forums.

Forums have to taken for what they are, often a helpful but rarely controlled space. Some of the weirdest, most misleading and harmful opinions I have come across come from these, which is a shame as they often contain the best way of getting multiple opinions in one place and a good feel for how something sits in its relative space.

Reviewers by definition tend to sign up more or less to a basic expectation of fairness, information paring and objectivity, well, more or less.

Forum goers adhere to no such guidelines, so range from those who actually put miss-informaion to the test and placate misgivings or reduce confusion to blatant attacks on any who disagree with their take on this micro world.

I use forums usually to find specific answers to specific questions or the get a feel in a general sense for a product or brand when I am new to a space. I never accept them as gospel.

Mixed loyalties.

We are all aware more or less that sponsorship is a thing, something some rely on to make a living and good on them. Many are up front about this, but not always.

Lists and reviews by stores will always have a certain level of bias, often this is hidden in their omissions. They are highly unlikely to negatively review their own products, so in lieu of a bad review, they will often not bother or may even divert.

These reviewers are also very good at giving exceptions to products like “if you are looking for a good budget item” or if you need battery operated, so always take these exceptions into consideration.

Context.

This is a tricky one. The title of the review may give you some idea what the reviewer is thinking, but even then, time, location and use case will often shift this.

Is the item the same price now as when reviewed****, is it dearer or cheaper in the reviewers country, has anything come out since that might compete with it (even a newer model of the same), what other gear are they using, what purpose are they working towards, are there other elements at work?

All of these factors can and often do have some effect.

A surprise can even pop up here when a working professional reveals a bit of gear that they probably would not have even thought to use until circumstances forced a work around and the results exceeded all expectations. Real use retrospectives and long term user reviews can be the the most useful you will come across, as long as they are relevant of course.

Need often creates clever work-arounds and rediscovered features and applications. You may even find a fix you already have.

Out of context.

Look outside the box as well. The best place to find the right info may not be where you think.

I recently found a brilliant video bag (5.11 Range Ready bag), while shopping for utility pants. I literally tripped over it in the shop and came away with a cheap, perfectly formed, robust bag capable of taking those oddly shaped video rigs and accessories.

Limiting myself to camera bags only coughed up the same, over priced specialist bags.

The drag effect.

This one is a little bit of a side note, but something I have added today, because the day after I published this post, it actually happened and I had not thought of it before in this way.

When you find something you like, you follow the trail, find more reviews, opinions, users, often you lose sight of the relevance of that item/idea/effect in the larger sense.

This came to light for me when I had a chat with a fellow videographer, someone I had not talked to in a while and someone more advanced than I, about cine lenses, or more specifically alternatives to brand name lenses for M43 format.

He mentioned names I had not stumbled over and I did the same for him. We had both found our “holy grail” brands, but neither had found each others.

I felt 7Artisans, TTArtisans, IRIX and Sirui were the best of their type and he threw new names at my like Kamlan or reminded me of discarded ones like Laowa or Samyang (based on being a store employee most likely).

We both learned something, but I learned the additional lesson that when you follow these trails, you tend to find what you are seeking, possibly at the expense of a wider view.

*

For me, the magic lies in a product that has minimum wastage, can be duplicated in some way adding depth and redundancy, is a class leader and often versatile, which for me is usually set to moderate or semi-pro level and finally is easy to use.

*I did photograph a wedding for a wedding photographer once. It was his daughters and he was forbidden from taking a camera.

**I had to choose between the Lewitt 040 Pure LDC with basically no noise floor and the 240 Pro MDC with a relatively higher noise floor. I went with the 240 (twice but for less), because I wanted depth, consistency and a rough price and performance balance with my 040 SDC’s and 440 dynamics (2 of each). Listening to some first field recordings through the 240 to the H8 Zoom revealed clarity and quietness far beyond anything I had ever heard.

If I had bought the dearer mic, I would have attributed all this to the superior quality of the mic, but the reality is the noise floor of the 240 was out of my danger zone and completely irrelvant if there is any actual noise to record.

***This one is common and really ticks me off. When understanding that a wider, brighter, larger aperture with less depth of field is a smaller number and a smaller, darker, closed down one with more depth of field has a larger number, is hard enough already. It does not help when the so-called advisor gets it wrong.

One of my favourite video Vloggers tends to call wider/brighter/opened up apertures smaller, which is just wrong.

****The Zoom H8 was almost twice it’s curent price on release a few years ago. It is now placed in the “great value as a skilled all-rounder” class, down from the “premium music recorder” class. I bought it as the former for under $500au, but many reviews were made when it was in the latter at $900-1100au. Was it a good buy? I doubt my needs will ever exceed what it offers, but it does give me a better than 90%’er in the areas of podcasting, field, music and video work.

Zoom Me Up Scotty!

Another Zoom is on the way.

This is a pint sized interface to fix the one small issue I have, which is powering XLR condenser mics with something small enough to attach to a rig.

The H5 is great, but even with the main capsule removed it is heavy and bulky and relies on a single screw thread for connection.

The F1 and EXH-6 twin XLR capsule does not provide phantom power to condenser mics.

The H8 is another beast all together.

This little critter is a giver.

The AMS-24 is a highly flexible and portable musicians interface, but it can also a handy, light, tough little twin XLR interface to a video camera, providing the needed phantom power.

It can be strapped to anything, dangle, go into a bag or pocket or be clamped to a stand.

I have looked at a lot of Zoom devices and this one, a decent special at $169au, seems to be the best fit. Basically this with a pair of Lewitt 040 Match SDC’s and you have a small universal recording kit or with a LCT 240 Pro makes a pod casting power house. At -120 dbu it is not a field recorder, but close enough for general use and better than many cheap recorders (same noise as the H5).

The even smaller AMS-22 was on my radar also, being only half the size, but it lost the option of battery power and the single input may have been limiting for only a little less money and really neither weighs much (AMS-24 is well under 200g with batts).

The bigger AMS-44 was not appealing because for its size and bulk with 4 mics attached, the H5 and even the H8 come into play and are even better platforms for that mess.

The Rise And (Self Driven) Demise Of A Newspaper Photographer

If you have been following this journey for a while (and thanks!), you will know I came from a hobby/self motivated snapper and camera salesman/teacher of over three decades to being a school then newspaper photographer almost by mistake and that was in the face of COVID lockdowns.

The school thing was a revelation for a photographer with no real intention of doing it as a career, but not a real job and that really hit home when our island state, previously impervious to COVID, opened the flood gates again and we went into semi-lockdown for six months, effectively shutting me down also.

I grabbed an opportunity for some hours at the local paper, something I had never really desired, because to be honest, I had trialled it years before as a temp and knew it was not going to be a road to satisfaction, only a rare, stable photographic income stream.

This became a full time job quite quickly, but when I realised I did not want that single tracked future, it became a part time job again, but glacially slowly. I missed an opportunity to work for the school I started with again (by a mere three months!), but luckily found another through contacts made ironically at the paper.

I always stuggled with the papers needs. I can do it, but I do not enjoy it. The very quick turn around, little to no prep, minimal equipment, very unnatural posed images and often poor reproduction along with a the lack of support and clear feedback at the paper have made me question not only if I am doing it right, but also if I want to do it at all (photography that is).

Once, this would have been my dream job, but it is a shadow of its former self, as are most things these days.

Not me, but good skills to learn.

In complete contradiction to that, I have been the papers video champion, something that surprises me as I came to the paper with the least experience in this field, but seem to be the most adept at shooting video and stills at the same time and turning these around quickly*. I also pay the most attention to the details I feel are important like microphones, lighting etc.

According to Dailymotion, our video server, we are creeping up on 1,000,000 views since using this service, which for our paper is about one year. Thanks to shooting our sports podcast which accounts for about half these views, it seems I am responsible for about 90% of that, maybe more and certainly the bulk of our in-house content. The sad reality is also, I only work half the week and rarely shoot video on the weekends.

Unfortunately, even though I seem to be in a position to (re)invent this space, there is little to no scope to take it further, because just like stills with the paper, you get it done with what fits in a shoulder bag (G9 mk1, MKE-400 mic, 12-40 Oly with ND filter, a small LED and occasionally a small tripod).

I feel this is a crucial part of our offer as a news service now prioritising online content over print, but it seems locally anyway, I am a little ahead of my time.

The other three photographers and almost all the journalists are shooting little or no video and it seems to be going mostly unnoticed when it is supplied, even though nationally, we are ahead of most in ratio of videos to stories posted (about 80%, not the 100% expected by head office, but far better than most). Ours are also local content not generic national clips which is so important for a local paper.

At first this was a gear thing, my humble G9 Mk1’s adding a tripod like stabiliser, great OOC 10 bit/422, 1080p and good sound with my MKE-400, compared to the D750 and D500’s the others were issued, but they now have Z9’s, so no excuses.

Anyway.

I am leaving the paper soon, hoping to pick back up with a school (the first one) as a base and do some private work (fear + excitement = working for yourself). Not for profits are still in this picture and may even be able to actually hire me occasionally, saving them money and adding some to my soon to be reduced income, but I am still doing these for the love of it.

Good for everyone.

New year, new, happier life path.


*I shoot my video while the journalist conducts their interview, as I do many of my candid stills, then set up a staged shot at the end. My 1-2 minute clips are produced in under 30 minutes, often faster depending on content. This occasionally, but rarely fails.

Night Walking

The Sirui on a G9 mk1 for testing (stills and video).

G9 Mk1 standard profile (set to defaults), ISO 1600, 1/60th, T1.2 about two stops under by the camera meter.

A little grade. The trick with this camera is to avoid very high ISO settings and under exposure, which work hand in hand.

Not about Selena, more about the Bokeh from the blinds in the background.

Wide open off centre. Not bad, certainly fine for video.

The meaty 7Artisan Spectrum lenses on the S5 feel good, the G9’s with the Sirui are equally nice, but different. Switching either dynamic seems pointless as they are both ideal for each system.

Now a quick switch to the G9II.

Stills from video are a thing these days. G9II Flat with a light grade.

Manual focus, hand held. Too easy.

Panning, The Other Motion Capture

When you have been watching things go around tracks for a little while, getting something different comes to mind.

With cars, it is usually a panning shot, but this can be difficult, sometimes impossible with erratically moving subjects.

Panning needs a few things;

• A subject that is moving predictably left to right and stays the same size.

• A fairly stable subject, with few moving parts and those parts should be contained. Heads in particular should be still, wheels turning looks good.

• A shutter speed that is slow enough to blur the background and some moving parts. The slower the better, but I find about 1/90 to 1/125 is about right.

• A smooth follow action that starts before and finishes after the image capture.

Turns out trotting or harness racing has the right balance of elements.

The driver and horse tend to be quite stable, the wheels turn neatly and the track is smooth and clean.

The next day at the horse racing I had little luck, but that was expected (too much head movement).

Odd and unwieldy as they look, these things move, something I wanted to convey. The key here is the still head.

The “frozen" action shot lacks that feeling of speed and danger (another rider came off on this corner and went home in an ambulance).

Bikes can work, sprinters also, but rarely distance runners, field sports can offer up the odd win, but generally smooth motion sports only.

Even foreground distractions can be mitigated. With cars also, it allows for wheel movement, that is far more dynamic and interesting than frozen wheels.

This one is a split between slow enough to read the background, fast enough to feel like a pan. This is a combination of a slightly faster shutter (1/180) and a slower car in the corner.

Not a pan, but the “grail” shot I guess is tight and panned.

The only issue is, if you get too carried away with panning, you are not prepared for the rare “incident” at the faster shutter speeds required.

Longer lenses are generally easier because they give you longer sweeps of a relatively similarly sized subject, but the most dramatic can come from wide angle lenses.

Days Racing By.

New Years eve and day were spent covering harness and horse racing.

Can you believe Christmas and New Years have gone already?

Not my thing really, but surprisingly cool to photograph.

The Cressy Harness racing event first in stunning light, with a track covered in a quite reflective gravel surface adding clarity and brilliance to the shots.

There is a restrained aggression to this sport.

It also added a certain grit to the shots.

The shape of this sport is photogenic in the extreme. the slower, lower racers and their rigs frame well and thanks to the width of the rigs, they are usually well spaced.

My 40-150 was a little too long for this (a 35-100 would have been perfect), so the groups were a little tight.

Gets you more involved though I guess.

New Years day saw me at the Longford racing carnival,

Grass, overcast light, faster horses and looser groups.

Aware that the finish would have tight crowds on the rails, possibly even tighter bunched horses and the reality that in one race already the winner was lost behind a crowd, I decided to try something new.

Climbing the hand rail of the only major grand stand I managed the two elements I wanted, the winner of the Cup and the decent crowd at this well supported event.

Big Wheels Keep Turning (Or The $10 Fix).

My Smallrig follow focus has been a good investment, but the gear (43T or 43 tooth) is designed for fairly short stills lens focus throw. To focus a stills lens from close to infinity may only take 60-90 degrees of rotation, which the 43T is ideal for.

The problem I have arises when you have the option of setting your stills lenses to a longer 180-270 degree throw or you employ actual cinema lenses.

My Spectrum, Sirui and IRIX lenses are either 270 or 180 degree throw, which when used with the 43T takes two or more full rotations of the focus wheel to go from close to infinity focus and usually requires you take your hand off, interrupting smooth focus to go from even near to relatively near. This means it is sometimes easier to just use the lens as is, which is pointless.

The 65T gear, discovered when I was looking for a rotation handle or similar for the follow focus rig (it has a square hollow in the handle that looked like it might have a use, but no) effectively halves the rotations.

The gear wheel is about twice the size of the original, making the focus rig quite a bit bigger, but the throw is much better and the focus wheel sits out more evenly.

I will hang on to the 43T for the odd stills lens I may adapt, but I doubt I will use it otherwise except for maybe macro work.

ed. another benefit is when the rig is reversed (when on a shoulder rig), the focus control now sits out far enough to be turned with my right hand.

The (Mostly) Blessings That Are Zoom Audio Recorders

I have relied on Zoom recorders of various types since the beginning of my video/audio journey.

The H1n

Cheap, light and capable. You can do and learn a lot with this little unit and it seemed very natural that it would float to the top in my early days.

The H1n was a sound (eh!) investment and the first one that many make on their journey to something better. Even professionals would rather a H1n to most other non specialist sound recorder options and it is very versatile.

This mic is sensitive, but has quite high self noise (only an issue in quiet situations like studios). It is a good device to learn when or even if this matters.

The trick with this little guy is to think outside of the box. It is light enough to go into a suit pocket as a LAV recorder or even just as is. It can be mounted in odd places with screws or tape, used as a backup or even on camera. It is a little like the OSMO Pocket of the sound world.

The H5

I bought the H5 to be a “proper” interface with a pair of Lewitt 040 Match pencil condensers. It did improve my recording options and quality, even though I did not think the actual utility of the unit through for my needs at the time.

I would guess the H5 is the most popular or at least best known single pro-am Zoom or even non-Zoom unit* because it is versatile, tough and decently good at everything it does.

It is often the logical next step for those wanting to enter this space, then holds on longer than many as a decent enough answer for even seasoned pro’s. It is in a word “handy”.

An updated H5 with quieter amps and a better interface would probably be the G9II of the audio world.

Needed accessories for mounted use. A bit much for a small rig.

The H5 added a pair XLR inputs, a lot of recording options, removable capsules and better self noise than the H1n. It is solid, reliable, has good battery life with capsules and records nice sound, but it has a fiddly menu, not the best self noise performance in it’s class, its battery life suffers* when powering condenser mics and it is too cumbersome to use with a camera rig (although I have seen plenty try!).

Capsules

Only a sample of the options on offer, but some of the strongest. The dual XLR capsule EXH-6 is solid and clean, the SSH-6 is a powerful shotgun and mid-side mic, the XYH-6 has 90 and 120 degree cover and the XYH-5 has shock mounts.

For the H5, H8 and F1, I have the two X/Y capsules, the SSH-6 mid-side shotgun and the twin XLR adapter.

The XLR unit seems quieter than the ports in the H5 in both ways. They are clean, but about two notches on the dial less sensitive.

The SSH-6 keeps floating to the top of my just get-it-done list with clear and powerful pickup.

Neither of the XY capsules get much use, but they are handy to have. The XYH-6 seems to be the better of the two, the XYH-5 is reserved for on camera use with the F1.

The F1

The little F1 on its efficient shock mount (warning though, once mounted it is hard to remove), the SSH-6 and XYH-5 capsules and the little power bank that partially fixed my broken battery door troubles (note the cable tie).

The F1 was bought in response to the H5’s bulk being unrealistic for on camera shotgun mic work, which annoyed me with excellent the SSH-6 at hand. I bought the LAV option as it was cheaper and the second shotgun held no interest.

The F series are “field”, not “handy” recorders, meaning they put sound quality over other factors, but the F1 is a contradiction, being so small it is handier even than the H1n and it takes capsules. I am torn which is the better LAV option out of the H1n and F1, so both are capable, but for on-camera work there is no comparison.

There are some other things going on though.

The battery issues from the H5 are a thing**, but worse and the fiddly little battery cover door is a disaster. When it is not broken it was fiddly and the frustrating. When it is broken, which most do it turns out, it is “throw it against the wall” annoying.

This also highlights the lack of local service options for Zoom. They have a warranty, but outside of that you are mostly on your own.

With the need to change batteries almost every time you use it for serious work, my door being held tight by cable ties, it is something I tend to just avoid, which is a shame**.

I can’t remember the self noise figures, but I think the F1 may be as good as the H8 with capsules, or even better and with the shock mount and SSH-6, it is a very decent shotgun/mid side mic. The manual volume dial is really intuitive.

Most Zoom devices share similar controls, the manual dial is my favourite, but the menues are usually different enough to need some practice. Even terminology like the handling of “mid-side” angles is different on every unit!

The power fix is a separate 5v power dock, which does ask the question why Zoom decided to use different connection ports for their H5, H1n and F1 units? More frickin’ cables!

I could have called it quits here, but a desire to run more than four XLR mics or more than two condensers (which need power from the unit, something the XLR adapter does not offer), got me looking at the F6, AMS-24 and H8. What tipped me over was price once I had read the H8 had better amps on it’s XLR ports than he H5/6, nearly as good as the F6 and the potential of even more mics.

The H8

Quite a different beast, especially with the EXH-6 capsule (which weighs half as much as the recorder).

The H8 is a monster, although only actually a little bigger than the H6, just very differently shaped.

With adapters it can take as many as 10 XLR mics, which is a whole rock band*** and the amps for these are better than the other H series units, although the capsule performance is apparently the same as the H5 and H6 recorders. The F6 is still better (-127 compared to -124 db self noise), but not by much so the H8 is plenty and takes more mics (8 with my setup) as well as other capsules.

The one area the F6 excels in mounting directly under a camera, but with cable running all over the place, that hardly reduces clutter.

The menu is a vast improvement over the other units using a colour touch screen interface, split menus for its several different roles and better battery life (and indication) than the others. I also appreciate most features have their own switch, which sometimes makes it feel like it has fewer features.

It is an odd creature, bigger than the H5, but smaller in scale, meaning the dials are smaller, the buttons tighter and it is blacker, harder, lighter and flatter feeling than the H5. It actually feels like it is made by a different company.

It also allows access to some extra capsules, like the ambisonic VRH-8, the powered EXH-8 4x XLR/TRS addition (10 XLR’s!), the XAH-8 X/Y+A/B (which I wish it came with), making it another class of interface in several ways.

AMS-24

This one fills a hole in my kit. I cannot power condenser microphones (Lewitt LCT 240 and 040) with anything small and light weight on a video rig. The F1 and dual XLR capsule does not supply power, the H5 is bulky and lacks contact points, the H8 is even worse.

At under 200g (with batteries), this can take two powered XLR mics and feed them out to a video camera (via the headphone output or USB-C). It can connect to the rig via soft strapping, be clamped or stuck to the rig or mic bracket or put into my pocket even. It is even light enough to just “dangle” if needed. One handy setup is to strap it to a power bank.

It also has the before unrealised benefit of allowing easy control of incoming and outgoing sound with main control dials. This is especially handy with less sensitive Dynamic mics, where you can set your incoming and out going gain in better balance. The other Zooms have easy incoming control, but often output is less intuitive (menu dive in the H5).

I can even use it to remotely run a couple of mics outside of, or to the H8.

*

Like a lot of things in my kit, the Zooms are an odd mix, but they work and no single item is useless or easily improved upon.

So, what is my take after a few years and a few units?

Overall I like them which I guess is obvious by my support of their line, as they are often the most flexible and straight forward answer, but they are not perfect. I really like how they just work and I rarely feel let down by the results, but their physical design is all over the place.

The company reminds me of Fuji. They are capable of anything, but department “A” and department “X” seem to operate in their own worlds and they rarely fix known issues (like the F1’s battery door).

I get excited by the options available, like the UAC-232 or M series, F2 and F3 float recorders and the F6 field recorder amongst others, but for now I am happy enough.

Most issues are fixable because above all else, they are flexible. Most are a recorder, an interface and a mic and the more I research sound options for musicians and videographers, the more Zoom devices I tend to see.

*The H6 takes 4 XLR mics, but is just that bit bigger and sound performance is much the same. The H4n is an H5 without a removable capsule and the original H4 has H1n grade amps. The H2 is interesting, but I have done its role several ways.

**The Zoom H5 and F1’s seem to have poor battery indicators with rechargeable batts, rarely giving three bars even with fresh Eneloop pro batts (set correctly), then drop to one bar very quickly and leave you unsure from that point when they will fail (often not for a while), so you change them over and over and I do not feel like trusting them for a 1hr video recording. It can be a little like driving a car on empty, not knowing when the actual “reserve” will give out. This is fixed with external 5v power from power banks, but that is the only option and adds more complication.

***A singer and their guitar, 3-4 amps or straight connections, overheads and main drums and a spare or two and/or the whole thing from a mixer.

Another Nifty Fifty..............Really?

Plenty of choice in this range now with the Sirui 24mm Nightwalker arriving.

Maybe an over serviced focal length?

Blue ring. The IRIX and this one stand out as different in a lot of ways.

Cosmetically, more of a middle ground look. Not overly cine, not stills.

To my surprise they are all similar in size. The surprise came from a massive difference in heft.

My oddly shaped cine kit seems to have balance still, in a literal sense anyway. The Sirui feels nicely weighted, but more like a solid stills lens.

The Spectrums are only a little heavier apparently, but the heft, their feeling of solidness is clearly greater, like the difference between aluminium and steel.

Very different up front. The 67mm filter thread gives me access to the bulk of my filters on a cine lens.

The lighter weight is a boon on the better stabilised M43 camera, the extra weight of the Spectrum lenses makes the S5 with its larger sensor and less efficient stabilising, more stable.

The mount is tight and clean, unlike the 12mm Vision lens.

The focus and aperture rings are a surprise. The Vision and Spectrum lenses are generally slightly damped, often the focus ring a little less than the aperture ring although they are seldom the same as each other, but the Sirui seems to have no dampening on either ring.

I am not at all bothered by the focus ring as it is fine and will usually have a follow focus used with it, but the aperture ring is something I will have to watch, possibly even tape it into place.

Wide open, focus is seemingly easy to acquire thanks to good contrast and sharpness (all images are with base Capture 1 in-out settings on an OM1.2), but depth of field is full frame-like.

Most of this series were in focus more or less, which considering it is my fastest lens (T1.2 or about F1.1), accuracy was tricky. The Bokeh is nice and clean, depth of field pleasantly transitioned and colour and contrast nice. There may be a little more brilliance to this lens than the Spectrums, but the Bokeh seems less gentle.

I remember being very content with the organic Bokeh of the Spectrum lenses. The Sirui sits about half way between the Spectrum and most of my stills lenses. It is capable of very nice blur, but it is also sometimes a little nervous, especially with defined edges.

Minimum focus is 0.3m, which is closer than this. Is it super stills lens sharp? No, but it is not meant to be and again, this is wide open at f-nothing.

The lens is a 48mm equivalent, but looks a little wider possibly because of some barrel distortion in close.

All 50’s in one form or another.

Lots of 50mm options (ten or more over the three formats), so an obvious base line to work from.

According to a test I have seen, the 35 Vision and 24mm Sirui are apparently similar in warmth (although I am not seeing that above), the 50mm cooler, the 35 and 50 match in “rendering” but not colour, the Sirui is a little different, but I think they and the IRIX can all be used in the same projects without too much issue.

My ideal cine lens would be the 30mm IRIX full frame which would also be a 45mm in APS-C, but the bill for that one is more than everything above. In an ideal world it would be the 21/32, 45/67, 65/98 and 150/225 IRIX, but in an ideal world there would be no wars, no famine, no disasters.

This is the cheap and solid option for my M43 kit and it fits well. The anamorphic 24mm was also tempting and a good point of difference, but I would like to put that to bed. I will try this lens with streak filters and some 2:1 anamorphic width and see what I get.

Next on the list is the Zoom M3 mic, which looks interesting.

Funny Little Lens, The TT Artisans 35mm f1.4.

Reading up on a hair brained idea (buying a 30mm f1.4 IRIX Dragonfly I found cheap in EF mount and adapting it to M43 and L-Mount), I rediscovered a couple of bits I had forgotten about.

The TTArtisans 35 f1.4 (L-Mount), that I bought last year to add to my full frame kit was a quickly forgotten curiosity, mostly because I did not use the S5 much and when I did, I kept it simple with the 20-60 zoom.

All metal including the screw in cap, the lens feels premium.

Being a crop frame lens, we are dealing with an APS-C or Super 35, 50mm or a 70mm in MFT format (where it may be less “characterful”).

The rings are befuddling. The aperture ring (front) is tiny and feels like it runs the wrong way (f1.4 is on the left end). The focus ring at the back is hard to locate, defies follow focus alignment and feels like it should be the aperture ring.

For a budding retro cinematographer or “old school” stills shooters it is probably a dream lens.

The brass tacks of it though is it is a very mixed, dare I say optically confronting bit of kit.

Full frame is not a serious option, looking more like the results from a Holga or Diana plastic film camera. The vignetting is cool/crap also with some “magnifying glass” edge artefacts at smaller apertures. Wide open at longer distances it is just cleanly “peep-hole” darkened.

Bought with character in mind, it seems I succeeded.

A rough APS-C crop. Nice, snappy separation wide open, massive edge distortion and muted colour. Maybe a perfect start for a fake anamorphic?

Bokeh like it’s 1979!

In focus we get snappy sharpness and pleasing blur. Distortion is a very real thing though.

The Bokeh in this shot is very reminiscent of the old 1960’s Pen F series half frame 25mm I have, as is the colour. When taking these, focus was a little hard to get. Peaking was a little fickle thanks to low contrast and a very thin plane of sharpness, but I hit more than I missed overall. It helps when you are not going for perfection from the get-go.

For stills, it shoots square well, giving you all the height of the frame almost the perfect cut off point to avoid the corner vignetting.

Dizzy yet? This image had a boost in contrast to combat the often flat look. Flat = cinematic = good?

Maybe a candidate for a faux anamorphic look, shot full frame with a 2:1 crop, a streak filter if I can step it down to the odd 39mm thread and then see what happens.

The focussing thing is problematic as 3ft to infinity is a thin hair of range, but maybe I have my itch for an anamorphic look answered?

At about 2:1 the far corners are lost to weirdness, the rest though is interesting. This is at f4 up close, so the vignetting takes on a whole other thing (top right).